Clinical introduction of a linac head-mounted 2D detector array based quality assurance system in head and neck IMRT

被引:31
|
作者
Korevaar, Erik W. [1 ]
Wauben, David J. L. [1 ]
van der Hulst, Peter C. [1 ]
Langendijk, Johannes A. [1 ]
Van't Veld, Aart A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Dept Radiat Oncol, NL-9700 RB Groningen, Netherlands
关键词
IMRT QA; 2D ionization chamber array; Dose reconstruction; Film dosimetry; Gamma index analysis; INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIOTHERAPY; PIXEL IONIZATION-CHAMBER; MONITOR UNIT SETTINGS; RADIATION-THERAPY; DOSE VERIFICATION; MULTILEAF COLLIMATION; SPATIAL-RESOLUTION; DYNAMIC-MODE; DOSIMETRY; DELIVERY;
D O I
10.1016/j.radonc.2011.09.007
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background and purpose: IMRT QA is commonly performed in a phantom geometry but the clinical interpretation of the results in a 2D phantom plane is difficult. The main objective of our work is to move from film measurement based QA to 3D dose reconstruction in a patient CT scan. In principle, this could be achieved using a dose reconstruction method from 2D detector array measurements as available in the COMPASS system (IBA Dosimetry). The first step in the clinical introduction of this system instead of the currently used film QA procedures is to test the reliability of the dose reconstruction. In this paper we investigated the validation of the method in a homogeneous phantom with the film QA procedure as a reference. We tested whether COMPASS QA results correctly identified treatment plans that did or did not fulfil QA requirements in head and neck (H&N) IMRT. Materials and methods: A total number of 24 treatments were selected from an existing database with more than 100 film based H&N IMRT QA results. The QA results were classified as either good, just acceptable or clinically rejected (mean gamma index <0.4, 0.4-0.5 or >0.5, respectively with 3%/3 mm criteria). Film QA was repeated and compared to COMPASS QA with a MatriXX detector measurement performed on the same day. Results: Good agreement was found between COMPASS reconstructed dose and film measured dose in a phantom (mean gamma 0.83 +/- 0.09, 1SD with 1%/1 mm criteria, 0.33 +/- 0.04 with 3%/3 mm criteria). COMPASS QA results correlated well with film QA, identifying the same patients with less good QA results. Repeated measurements with film and COMPASS showed changes in delivery after a modified MLC calibration, also visible in a standard MLC check in COMPASS. The time required for QA reduced by half by using COMPASS instead of film. Conclusions: Agreement of COMPASS QA results with film based QA supports its clinical introduction for a phantom geometry. A standard MLC calibration check is sensitive to <1 mm changes that could be significant in H&N IMRT. These findings offer opportunities to further investigate the method based on a 2D detector array to 3D dose reconstruction in a patient anatomy. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 100 (2011) 446-452
引用
收藏
页码:446 / 452
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] CLINICAL INTRODUCTION OF COMPASS FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) IN HEAD AND NECK IMRT
    Korevaar, E.
    Wauben, D.
    van der Hulst, P.
    Langendijk, H.
    van't Veld, A.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2009, 92 : S88 - S88
  • [2] Implementation of a linac head-mounted matrix detector to clinical use for dynamic technique
    Szczurek, L.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2017, 123 : S783 - S783
  • [3] Evaluation of a 2D diode array for IMRT quality assurance
    Létourneau, D
    Gulam, M
    Yan, D
    Oldham, M
    Wong, JW
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2004, 70 (02) : 199 - 206
  • [4] Head-Mounted Display for Clinical Evaluation of Neck Movement Validation with Meta Quest 2
    Trinidad-Fernandez, Manuel
    Bossavit, Benoit
    Salgado-Fernandez, Javier
    Abbate-Chica, Susana
    Fernandez-Leiva, Antonio J.
    Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I.
    SENSORS, 2023, 23 (06)
  • [5] Audit of a standardized nomenclature system for head and neck (HN) IMRT contouring, planning, and quality assurance
    Liu, C.
    Kim, J.
    Breen, S.
    Waldron, J.
    Bayley, A.
    Cummings, B.
    Ringash, J.
    Dawson, L.
    Huang, S. H.
    Ryan, M.
    Chau, L.
    Kaminsky, I.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2007, 84 : S30 - S30
  • [6] In Vivo Quality Assurance of Head and Neck Cancer IMRT Treatments Using TomoTherapy' 's Exit Detector Data
    Goddu, S.
    Rodriguez, V.
    Gay, H.
    Yang, D.
    Ramirez, J. Garcia
    Yaddanapudi, S.
    Mutic, S.
    Thorstad, W.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2011, 38 (06) : 3458 - +
  • [7] Clinical Application of the DAVID System and 2D-ARRAY for Quality Assurance in IMRT Treatments
    Poppe, B.
    Looe, H.
    Ruehmann, A.
    Harder, D.
    Willborn, K.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (06)
  • [8] Correlation between 2D and 3D patient specific quality assurance in head and neck cancers
    Bhasker, Suman
    STRAHLENTHERAPIE UND ONKOLOGIE, 2019, 195 (12) : 1123 - 1123
  • [9] A standardized nomenclature system for head and neck (H&N) IMRT contouring, planning and quality assurance
    Kim, J. J.
    Breen, S. L.
    Waldron, J. N.
    Bayley, A. J.
    Cummings, B. J.
    Ringash, J.
    Dawson, L. A.
    Liu, C.
    Huang, S.
    O'Sullivan, B.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2007, 69 (03): : S473 - S473
  • [10] Feasibility of using a 2D array detector to verify composite IMRT delivery for helical tomotherapy and linac
    Shueng, P.
    Choug, N.
    Lee, H.
    Tien, H.
    Kung, W.
    Wu, L.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2008, 72 (01): : S675 - S675